Carl's 5-Minute Film Reviews

[steelba]

Quarantine (2008):. 8/10.

:shakehead

[IKickAssForTheLord]

Quarantine Didn't like that movie at all.

[Dragonmanes]

That and Cloverfield I find the biggest discrepancies on when reading other reviews. I loved the flicks and think they both nailed the trend in hyper-realism horror, so I fully support them, but I know that I am in the minority and that most genre fans were disappointed with each of them. Consider me their target audience!

[steelba]

They are not hyper reality, they're shitty POV fiction, and you also gave Wishmaster 2 a 7/10

Liked the reviews but now your credibility is taking a hit, gonna have to avoid all the 7's and 8's you review if I haven't seen em :starefreak:

Saw 4 was horrid aswell.

[strtfghtr]

don't listen to steelba, I think you are on with the wishmaster reviews. Divof rocks in them and 2 def had some great kills.

I like the short review format, keep em coming.

[steelba]

don't listen to steelba, I think you are on with the wishmaster reviews. Divof rocks in them and 2 def had some great kills.

I like the short review format, keep em coming.

I understand it's just an opinion which is all good & fine, but he's giving some seriously weak movies strong ratings, I could pull more out of there...

[IKickAssForTheLord]

I did like cloverfield I'll give you that... its probably cuz I heard a lot of ppl sayin' it sucked and all that, so I went into it wit low hope... But I ended up enjoyin' it well!

[Dragonmanes]

I dont know if this rationale is going to make sense outside of my brain, but I will try my best..

I rate the films on the same scale as I would grade students on a graduated scale and a curve, and not based on the same ratings system you would find on IMDB and such. If a film makes a valid effort and isnt an abysmal wreck, I find it hard to rate it below a 6, which I consider a D movie. A 7 would then reflect an average, middle of the road flick that can slide by due to decent effects, better than D acting, or with indie flicks a great concept and competent execution based on their budget. A 10 then would be an extremely rare film that exceeds in every possible field, and would be reserved for films that define the genre.

I believe a 5 would constitute average on IMDB, so my rating scale is not going to reflect the same ratings as other reviewers, but given the Wishmaster 2 example:

Films rated 6:
-Halloween 5
-Darkness Falls
-Girl's Nite Out

Wishmaster 2

Films rated 8:
-Demons
-Hills Have Eyes (2006)
-Let's Scare Jessica to Death

Wishmaster 2 definitely harbors closer to a 6 than a 7, but if you factor in entertainment value consider it a generous rating. I would never consider myself the definitive answer in critiquing film, but I do my best to provide an accurate rating based on my subjective opinion. Its all in good fun anyways :thumbup3:

[steelba]

that does help as I slate mediocre as a 5 and 6 is average, but watchable.

[Dragonmanes]

I browsed through my collection again to refresh on what I originally rated each of the DVDs when I generated the list on DVDAF, and it absolutely needs revisions for certain titles, but consider my ratings scale the 'college curve' of ratings; you really have to work hard to earn an F, and when you get it, you truly deserve it. I slip up occasionally and exaggerate ratings like for The Wicker Man remake and House of the Dead, but then, who could resist?

[Dragonmanes]

Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers (1988): Intentionally terrible Pulp magazine spoof involving a detective tracking down a cult of Egyptian blood-cultist hookers that have been making sacrifices via chainsaw. Dreadful acting, ridiculous over the top gore, Gunnar Hansen and Linnea Quigley, whats not to love? The film is actually has very smart and witty writing despite the cheeseball plot and micro-budget. Good for a laugh and very much in the vein of Street Trash, recommended for you B-Movie lovers out there! Rating: 6/10. Entertainment: 8/10.

Gore Gore Girls (1972): Outside of a few scenes of typical over the top HG Lewis gore, this flick has little to offer anyone. The pacing is hampered by 5m stripteases which might suit a bad porno perfectly, but serve little purpose when they could have just been implied or shortened. Lewis doesnt disappoint, giving us the usual corny acting and garbage dialogue, but if you stick it out, youll be rewarded with those golden nuggets of gore that make it all seem worth it. Strippers begin dropping off at the hands of a gloved killer, and its up to a private eye to stop them! If youre new to HG Lewis, drop this lower on the priorities list and check out the Blood Trilogy and the Wizard of Gore first. Rating: 4/10. Gore: 8/10.

[Dragonmanes]

Koma (2004): Decently executed slasher out of China, with a visual style that reflects Argento's Tenebrae. A woman with disfunctional kidneys is stalked by a maniac that has been stealing kidneys for the black market, while she battles emotionally with her boyfriend's mistress. There are a few scenes that offer reasonable tension, and a little blood, but the biggest strength of the film lies in the character development of the two female leads. Nothing really new or unique, but it makes for an ok watch. 7/10.

Little Shop of Horrors (1986): The musical format perfectly suits this film, and allows the audience to suspend disbelief despite the outrageously over the top acting and plot. A poor plant keeper finds love and success after nursing a rare carnivorous plant back to health, but the plant soon begins demanding more than just blood to survive.. Catchy music numbers, simple but engaging plot, and awesome puppetry used for the Audrey II plant. Fun horror comedy for anyone that can accept the musical format! 8/10.

[Dragonmanes]

Sisters (1972): Excellent early De Palma entry that unmistakingly draws from several Hitchcock inspirations, ranging from score to stylistic devices. Margot Kidder offers a commanding performance as the mentally distraut Danielle, and De Palma introduces unique visual tools like split screen and binocular vision to prove his skills dont stop at cheap immitation. A journalist tracks one of two twin sisters after witnessing a murder from her apartment, only to become wrapped in their twisted psychosis. Highly recommended, especially for Hitchcock fans. 9/10.

[Dragonmanes]

Alone in the Dark (2005): Its clear not 2m into the film that youre in for a SciFi Channel Original level snore fest, with the combined acting talents of Christian Slater and Tara Reid cementing the fact that the film is going to be terrible. I went in assuming people had unjustly underrated the film after Boll's amazing HotD, but there really is little going for it. In it, an ex-FBI special ops agent and an archeologist must stop an encrouching race of alien (?) beings that can displace light and electricity. Boredom ensues. The plot and acting are both by the books, and though Boll does make valid attempts at adding unique shots (zooming into a gun barrel as the shot is fired, watching the next round reload, then trailing it through the target), much of the film could have been directed by any movie buff that has taken enough notes from successful films (Alien, Aliens, Terminator), which have had a not-so-subtle impact on Boll's work. For a SciFi Channel Original, this would have been better than average, however as a theatrical feature, it slides by with a low D on almost every level. 5/10.

Luther the Geek (1990): Utterly strange tale of a kid that witnesses a geek biting off the head of a chicken, which scars him for life and causes him to bawk like a chicken and bite peoples throats out with his custom razor dentures. Outside of the excessive gore and throat tearing (which is awesome), the film builds genuine suspense with some of the edits and camera positions, similar to the camera work in Mute Witness. Relatively simple plot but unique and effective. The biggest area for improvement in this one would have to be the pacing, which takes a dive after the first half hour. Overall, worth at least a single view for something completely off the wall! 7/10.

[Darkgod]

You gave Halloween 5, and Darkness Falls a 6? Im with Steelba. Your rating system is taking a hit.

[Dragonmanes]

I can respect that, most would rate them much lower, and in Halloween 5's case I would agree thats more than a little generous, but Darkness Falls, with all of its inherent flaws, still made an effort to try something new with the light and shadow play. Several of the ideas they pulled off pretty well, like the bathroom scene in the opening, and the hallway scene towards the end. I dont particularly like the film, and I wont be the one to defend it for being an amazing film, but that is one of the few films that I feel gets a worse rap than it deserves. Alone in the Dark was certainly worse than Darkness Falls.

Memento Mori (1999): This sequel to Whispering corridors blends the subtlety of Let the Right One In, the grace of A Tale of Two Sisters, and the lesbianic obsession of High Tension in an artistically lensed girls school chiller. A student finds the diary of two secret lovers, and becomes obsessed with their relationship when one takes a long dive off a short building. Soon after, the dead girl's tormentors begin falling prey to her ghost. Its refreshing to get an asian ghost movie without a pale-faced, long black-haired ghost for a change, and this film will not fail to please any asian horror or haunting fan. Probably the best in asian horror I have seen since A Tale of Two Sisters. 8/10.

[Dragonmanes]

The Phatom of the Opera (1925): A mysterious figure kidnaps an opera singer and proposes to coach her into taking the lead role in the opera as a means of winning her love, but when she learns of his disfigurement, she attempts to escape his grasp. The production designs and makeup work are both amazing for the time, with the opera set still being one of the largest studio sets ever built. Erik is both empathetic and terrifying at the same time as the elusive phantom, and Chaney remains the definitive face of the character nearly a century later. Most of the violence is implied off camera, so dont expect a lot of action, but the film is still very good, though it may not suit the tastes of modern horror fans. 9/10.

[Dragonmanes]

One Dark Night (1983): Weird little film where a girl enters a mausoleum for an initiation, when a telepathetic corpse starts trouble, causing stiff mannequins that sort of resemble corpses to akwardly float around, but not really do anything. The FX are pretty cheesy but they made a valid effort. The movie doesnt get going for about 1hr, but after that it maintains a decent pace. As the movie approaches its climax, the music, lighting, and atmosphere actually contribute to an erie mood. If you can get through the first hour, the ridiculous cheesefest makes for a little fun, but as a whole the film is entirely passable.

Rating: 5/10.

**Note: This is one of two films released in 1983 under the title Mausoleum, although this one ended up dropping the title in place of One Dark Night. The other Mausoleum is quite possibly terribler, with even WORSE effects and acting, and no Meg Tilly.

[Dragonmanes]

Mountaintop Motel Massacre (1983): More like "Some Crazy Old Bitch Kills Everyone At Her Shitty Motel, Only Its About As Bloody As Punky Brewster. It Also Takes Place On A Mountain." Stupid, boring slasher that couldnt be more conventional unless it had a holiday in the title. I wish I could give the director enough credit to say the MPAA edited the gore out, but even with some more of the red stuff this flick is still garbage. Avoid. 4/10.

I Drink Your Blood (1970): Classic grindhouse fun for the whole family! A boy gives meat pies tainted with rabies to a group of satanic hippies out of revenge for his grafather. A rapid hippie murder spree ensues. Plenty of bloody gags, and an off the wall plot you could have only gotten away with in the 70s. The flick is entirely cheesy, but its the "Damn, that was fun" cheesy and not the "Holy crap, I cant believe I wasted my time with this" cheesy. Liked it much more on each consecutive watch through, definitely worth checking out! 7/10.

[Dragonmanes]

Been reading through the ratings people are posting in the recently viewed horror thread, and just for the sake of argument I wanted to see if you could elaborate on your 5/10 for Creep so I have a better idea of how you guys are rating the films, Darkgod.

For me, a 5/10 would extend out to a 50/100, which by my standards would mean the film was abysmal, took no direction or lead, had terrible acting, and was a conventional retread of standard horror. I did not feel Creep was bad by any means, and alongside Neil Marshall I feel that Christopher Smith is one of the up and coming directors out of the new wave of English horror. With Creep at a 5/10, I cant see any film rating higher than an 8 by comparison.

I may not share the same ratings system as many of the people in that thread, both with people underrating and grossly overrating many films, but I still feel I am offering a fair assessment on each of the films I review according to the scale I presented earlier.

Not trying to call you out at all, just very curious as to how everyone else bases their ratings!